Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="OmegaMan950" data-source="post: 5917201" data-attributes="member: 49115">This is some good stuff, it's building upon the groundwork laid out in the 3rd edition Unearthed Arcana, Dragon Magazine variants, and the 4E options. I'm not too worried about the terminology but the "paladin" class to me is an extemely fervent warrior of a particular cause, an example being LG, CG, LE, and CE in 3rd Ed.This is a really important point as a lot of people have different views on what constitutes lawful good behaviour. Some people like black and white views of morality which works for fast and easy-going gaming, while others prefer shades of grey. Factor in also a lot of people look back to medieval periods as a benchmark for what was involved in chivalry and that makes things even more complicated - what was accepted back as benevolent behaviour back then probably isn't now. This mainly concerns a paladin following an ethical code as their divine beneficary, but what about a paladin following different gods? A paladin of Lathander is going to be different to a paladin of Illmater, and a paladin of the Host is going to be different to a paladin of the Silver Flame, even though they're all "lawful good", if worst comes to worst they might even come to blows.This is also a good point - the term paladin differs in respect to the story and the mechanics. I've always thought the Greyhawk god Trithereon (spelling?) a CG god was an awesome choice for a paladin's diety, but the mechanics got in the way, and I've always thought the best "defender of justice" storywise in a 3.5ed game would be a diviner, using spells (though really annoying in a mystery game, that's another thread.) to route out evil at its source with as little blood lost or innocents hurt as possible.This really needs to be held up and shouted from the roof tops. Alignments (if used in game, I personally dislike the alignments) help promote roleplay, not curb it. Codes and "Lawful Good" mixing in a bad way lead to the "Lawful Stupid" paladin playI agree with this too a degree, but only because I like to keep mechanics and flavour seperate. I understand some people don't like that though. I agree with Remathilis and think that Essentials and Heroes of Shadow nailed what should be done in contrasting paladins and blackguards.I'd prefer a base class first called whatever - knight, templar, champion, crusader, etc. that is alignment/diety neutral, and then build your LG paladin or Tyrant of Bane or whatever from that rather then starting with the LG paladin and building from there. I, however, wouldn't be upset if they did it that way and did it well</blockquote>

Verification